On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Is linux's ARP implementation RFC compliant? I am still looking for the
>
> As far as we can tell yes
>
> > I have a linux box as eth0 208.206.76.5, and eth0:1 207.138.69.69
> > tcpdump arp (on the 208.206.76.5 machine, while I ping from 208.206.76.1)
> >
> > 21:51:24.208529 eth0 B arp who-has 207.138.69.69 tell 208.206.76.1
> > 21:51:24.208562 eth0 > arp reply 207.138.69.69 (0:40:5:a3:59:25) is-at 0:40:5:a3:59:25 (0:50:54:7f:63:c0)
>
> That seems sensible. eth0 according to your note above has eth0:1 which matches
> the queried address.
right. But the address that did the querying is not in the same subnet as
the address it was asking for. With BSDI For example, it will not respond
to an ARP request unless the address you are asking for is in the same
subnet/cidr as the address you are asking from............they say this is
a security measure and brought up its how the rfc's say it should
be...........I am not saying that is correct, I was just trying to get the
bottom line......thanks
>
> Alan
>
-----------------------------------------------------
Brian Feeny (BF304) signal@shreve.net
318-222-2638 x 109 http://www.shreve.net/~signal
Network Administrator ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 21:00:17 EST